Web-only letters to the editor, June 28, 2012

Dispatch.com regularly will post letters to the editor that don't make it to print in The Dispatch. Unlike letters to the editor that appear in the newspaper, Web-only letters have not been edited.

Dispatch.com regularly will post letters to the editor that don't make it to print in The Dispatch. Unlike letters to the editor that appear in the newspaper, Web-only letters have not been edited.

AEP

I write in response to the Dispatch editorial titled “A Powerful Decision” (June 24, 2012). The Dispatch argues that AEP needs to have a transition to remain financially strong, give balance to Wall Street, and to continue partnering with the community. Yet, all electric utilities in Ohio—including AEP—were allowed by law to transition to a competitive market over 13 years ago. AEP simply wants customers to pay for a second bite at the apple.

What’s most upsetting is that the Dispatch wants to ensure AEP gets its government-guaranteed profits, in part, on the backs of small-business owners who have been struggling through this recession.

I appreciate that AEP provides thousands of jobs, particularly in Central Ohio. But, as a small-business owner and member of the National Federation of Independent Business, I’m more concerned about the small businesses that employ nearly half of all Ohio workers and traditionally create two out of three new jobs annually yet would bear the heaviest burden under AEP’s proposal. Ohio small businesses pay taxes and are great community partners in their own right. That’s why I’m hoping the PUCO will side with small-business owners on Main Street over AEP’s performance on Wall Street.

Kelly Moore, Newark

AEP

Your June 24 editorial “Powerful Decision” was correct on one point – the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio’s upcoming ruling on AEP’s proposal to increase electric bills over the next three years and block customers from switching to suppliers offering lower prices will have major consequences.

But the editorial ignores and invites the PUCO to ignore objective analysis, good public policy, the real issues and the law. Frankly, it is difficult to differentiate between the content of your editorial and AEP’s paid advertisement that appeared on page A 11 of the paper. It is amazing that the Dispatch suggests that the PUCO should focus on Wall Street rather than Main Street, where more than 20 residential, commercial and manufacturer stakeholders and organizations are protesting AEP’s effort to sustain its monopoly. These 20 stakeholders speak for thousands of AEP customers.

Let’s look at what AEP is asking the PUCO to approve:

The first main prong of AEP Ohio’s proposal would cause electric bills to increase annually as they have since 2006. Some of these increases will hit electric bills through riders and surcharges that will make it difficult for customers to predict their how much they will have to pay AEP month to month. The rate increases will occur during a period when electric prices are at historic lows and are declining in other parts of the state where customers can select their electricity supplier.

Under the second main prong of AEP’s proposal, they seek to force other electric suppliers to pay a “shopping tax” that AEP designed to make customers captive to AEP’s rate increases. Over the three-year period, the AEP shopping tax raises the price paid by other electric suppliers 500% above the prevailing market price.

If Wall Street’s perceptions were a legitimate consideration, we don’t think the PUCO’s approval of annual rate increases at a time when electric prices are declining elsewhere and a shopping tax designed to block customer access is the right approach to positively impact those perceptions.

We urge the PUCO to turn down AEP’s proposed rate plan If AEP gets its way, customers lose. And, Ohio itself will lose at a time when our Governor is working so hard to make Ohio a place that embraces manufacturing competitiveness.

David W. Johnson, Summitville

Energy choices

Ohioans deserve more from Governor Kasich than partisan rhetoric. But in his June 10 op-ed captioned "Ohio picking up slack in energy policy, that's what we got. Kasich claims that Ohio faces "major headwinds on energy from Washington," glibly adding that coal "irritates the current president." He omits to tell readers several other facts. Yes, under Administrator Lisa Jackson, EPA is finally closing Clean Air Act loopholes that the coal industry has exploited for years -- many of them loopholes that were supposed to be closed by congressional amendments to that law back in 1990.

Mercury pollution from burning coal impairs brain and neurological development in children. The Center for Disease Control estimates that as many as one in six US women of childbearing age has toxic levels of mercury in her bloodstream. Regarding the standard industry whining that we can't afford measures to protect public health, EPA's regulatory review shows that the new rules on mercury and other air toxics will save far more in health costs than the rules will cost. These health standards are a win-win, and Senator Sherrod Brown and Mayor Michael Coleman deserve credit for supporting them.

Regarding another energy-related issue, global warming, Governor Kasich has acknowledged the reality of climate change, but completely ducks the issue in his column -- perhaps because Mitt Romney conveniently reversed his own position not long before the GOP primaries. Real experts have had consensus on climate science for years now: a 2010 Stanford University survey of hundreds of leading climate scientists showed that 97 percent agree that human activity is causing climate change. The Supreme Court ordered the Bush-era EPA to take steps to regulate greenhouse gases as pollutants, and coal-fired power plants are one of the largest single sources of greenhouse gas pollution -- pollution that also aggravates asthma in kids. Yes, governor, the EPA is complying with the order of the Supreme Court, following the law, and following science that's been called "fundamentally sound" by the the National Academy of Sciences. That so many Republican leaders deny established science speaks only to the depth of their cynicism.

As for the natural gas hydrofracking boom, a 2005 Republican Congress and President exempted drillers from basic environmental laws such as the Safe Drinking Water Act. Drillers have zero obligation to disclose what kind of toxic chemicals they inject into the ground. With thousands of new wells, inadequate regulation and inadequate state-level enforcement resources, leaks are inevitable -- and Mitt Romney vow to slash EPA funding would make these problems worse. Ohio's recent law continues to protect drillers from up-front disclosure, and fails to protect the public. To make matters worse, Governor Kasich seems hell-bent on opening state parks and other protected public lands to drilling.

Like Mitt Romney, Governor Kasich would apparently have us believe we need to choose between protecting Ohio kids from toxic mercury or jobs -- between clean air and clean water or jobs. That's a false choice. Investments in clean energy are creating jobs in Ohio. Protecting the public from polluted air saves us money. Governor Kasich should stop writing op-ed pieces for the Romney campaign and tell Ohioans the truth about our energy choices.

David A. Scott

Sierra Club

Columbus

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.